1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On April 10, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 49,180,60,000 to the Defendant’s account as stated in the attached list, including the transfer of KRW 1,00,00 to the Defendant’s account in the name of the Defendant, as well as the transfer of cash to the Defendant’s account as indicated in the attached list, or the payment of the Defendant’s insurance premium by proxy, on May 19, 2013. Thereafter, the Plaintiff paid KRW 40,495,150 in total on three occasions, including the payment of KRW 8,685,450 on three occasions, and thereafter, paid KRW 49,180,60 on May 19, 2013, the Defendant agreed to borrow KRW 50,00 from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff on May 19, 2013, and paid KRW 60,600 on June 20, 2016.

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 17 and 23 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from September 10, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is the following day after the copy of the claim and the application for modification of the cause of claim in this case was served on the defendant, as requested by the plaintiff, as the repayment date for the 49,180,600 won as requested by the plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that the Defendant prepared a loan certificate with the same content as the prior approval on May 19, 2013. However, there was no obligation to repay the loan since there was no money as stated in the loan certificate from the Plaintiff thereafter, and there was no obligation to pay the loan certificate, and if the Defendant prepared a loan certificate, he/she believed the Plaintiff’s statement that he/she would lend 50,000,000 won with it, and thus, it is invalid as a false declaration of intent.

(b) The conclusion of the judgment document is recognized as authentic.